1. Field of the Invention
This application pertains generally to elevated walking devices involving user translation, commonly referred to as stilts, and more particularly to such devices having a specific step or shoe engaging structure. More particularly, the present invention pertains to a shoe or boot-engaging structure which securely engages a user's shoe or boot, and which is readily affixed to existing and diverse stilts, in particular to those stilts which are articulating. The present invention, in combination with articulating stilts, provides natural bio-mechanical motion that has been absent or unattainable in the prior art.
2. Description of the Related Art
The concept of stilts is a very old one, predating the United States patent system. Illustrating this is U.S. Pat. No. 31, 210 to Johnson, simply entitled “Stilt,” dating back to January, 1861. This patent is clearly not the first conception of stilts, but is instead an improvement thereto. At the time of this patent, this stilt simply provided a foot rest or step onto which a user would stand, without any straps or bindings holding one's shoes thereto.
As might be expected from such an old technology, there have over the years been a wide variety of improvements, and an associated increase in applications to which the benefits of stilts have been applied. One application from earlier times is believed to have been simply that of improved transportation, through both wetlands and also above troublesome low-lying flora and fauna. Through the years, and beyond entertainment with which most people are familiar, many other diverse applications have evolved. There are many agricultural applications, including the gathering of fruits and nuts, the pruning of trees, and improved viewing of flocks. Construction applications have likewise developed, including the use of stilts with drywall finishing, painting, electrical and plumbing work, window washing, and ceiling installation and repair. There have been many other diverse applications too numerous to mention where the additional elevation afforded by stilts has or might prove to be highly desirable.
One patent which is particularly exemplary of the improvements that have been made is U.S. Pat. No. 3,902,199 to Emmert, the teachings which are incorporated by reference. The Emmert patent illustrates one particular stilt design which has met with much long term commercial success. Therein, an articulating stilt is illustrated. For the purposes of the present specification, an articulating stilt will be understood to mean a stilt which permits a variation in the angle between a line drawn between the toe and heel of the stilt and the vertical risers, and which couples this variation in angle to a boot engaging member or members, such that the wearer will have an ability to both sense and through natural movement control the variation of this aforementioned angle. Through the linkages illustrated and taught by Emmert, a wearer has the ability to pivot their foot and the stilt foot in a natural motion during forward and backward movement. It is, for example, possible to remove all weight from the heel portion, and stand entirely on the toe portion of the stilt.
In spite of the capabilities that are afforded through these stilts or leg extensions, an important issue has always been and continues to be that of safe use. As is well known, the additional height that the stilts provide is the feature that makes stilts desirable in many applications, but is also the feature that makes falls far more dangerous. Falls from only somewhat greater heights are disproportionately more hazardous. In addition, the extra length provided by the stilts in association with the coupling between person and stilts at only a few discrete places may also place unusual forces upon the leg that can lead to strains, sprains and fractures that are both different from and frequently more severe than could occur without the stilts. Finally, a wearer has no sensitivity at the extremity, which is quite unlike a living foot containing many active sensory nerves. Consequently, electrical cords, ropes, wires, uneven surfaces, and other obstacles and challenges may adversely affect the ability of a person to step properly and might then lead to a spill. In view of the direct correlation of harm with a fall where a person was wearing stilts, the chances of problems have heretofore been believed to be greater with stilts than without. As a result, the use of stilts has been effectively eliminated in the workplace in several states.
Heretofore, the industry has attempted to ameliorate the dangers associated with stilts by providing only nominal coupling between a person's foot or shoe and the stilts. Lightweight and narrow leather, cotton or poly straps with simple buckles have been used to retain the shoe with the stilt. In the event of an impending fall or spill, the person may pivot their foot relative to the support, or even in some cases remove their foot from the stilt, thereby theoretically enabling them to land foot down on the ground. This ability to pivot within relatively narrow and loose-fitting straps, or to completely remove one's foot from the stilt, has long been felt to provide the least chance for fractures and other serious injuries. Further, the relative motion that can be obtained between the foot and the higher leg support was thought to offer at least some opportunity for a decrease or amelioration of the unusual forces.
In stark contrast, the present inventor has determined that these assumptions made in the prior art were only correct for the types of bindings which were known and used in the industry, and even then were commonly only partially correct. As but one example, it is entirely impossible to predict the interaction between an unknown boot or shoe and the straps of the prior art. In some combinations, the straps may simply slide away during a fall. In other cases, the straps and shoe-wear may bind and force undesirable injury.
Further complicating the predictable operation of the prior art straps is the tendency for these prior art straps to loosen during use. Leather and cotton both tend to stretch as a result of the application of large forces, causing the straps to lengthen during use. However, when the stilts are removed and temporarily stored, the materials will return to their original pre-use size. This tendency to return to original shape means that with each and every use the straps are subject to undesirable loosening. Loosening in turn is directly associated with a loss of control over the position and operation of the stilts. Loss of control increases the chance of an accident or fall. Nevertheless, it is this same characteristic of stretching upon the application of unusually large forces that the designers have relied upon to provide safe release from the straps, or at least reduction of harm to a user, during a fall or accident. Consequently, the very feature that the prior art relies upon for safety is responsible for a loss of control and the inducement of accidents. Furthermore, to ensure the effectiveness of this “safeguard”, narrow straps are preferred, since such straps will stretch most on the application of large forces. Once again though, contrary to desirable use and wear, the narrow straps provide the least amount of comfort and control for a wearer, and these narrow straps require frequent readjustment just to keep the stilts in place.
A number of other types of stilts and straps are known and represented in the prior art. These patents include U.S. Pat. Nos. 6,648,803 to Jay; 4,570,926 and 5,498,220 to Ensmenger; 5,295,932 and 5,514,054 to Rowan; D359,313 to Hashman; 6,517,586 to Lin; 4,255,822 to Dixon; 4,415,063 to Hutchinson; 5,593,373 to Hale; published application 2005/0202940 to Simmons; and French patent 2,620,345 to Champel; the teachings of each which are incorporated herein by reference.
In the present invention, through a selection of a very different type of strap in combination with a preferred type of stilt, the likelihood of injury may be reduced significantly and is believed to be lower than the likelihood of injury from not using the stilts.
This surprising result is better appreciated when the alternatives to stilts are considered. For exemplary purposes, in the construction trade the use of a ladder is extremely inefficient. A worker may only reach a few feet in each direction from the ladder without unbalancing the ladder and potentially tipping it. On uneven or irregular surfaces, the ladder may even initially be unbalanced, not standing correctly on all four feet. A worker trying to reach too far in any direction while on a ladder, including but not limited to climbing to the top of a ladder, is known to be the cause for many construction injuries. To expand reach and elevation, while still avoiding the use of stilts, other workers rely instead upon portable scaffolding. This scaffolding requires significant set-up and take-down time, and the scaffolding itself may have significant mass or weight. The disassembly and movement of such scaffolding is, in and of itself, a common cause of workplace injuries.
What is desired then is a way to best ameliorate the deficiencies of prior art stilts, such that the risks of use are less than the risks associated with alternatives, so that the use of stilts may be applied to all situations where stilts are inherently more efficient than the alternatives.